BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Binastro" data-source="post: 3227063" data-attributes="member: 111403">.Hi Oracleman,344 feet is 115 m at 1000 m, not 105 m.I think that recently or maybe long-term the Canon USA website has errors. Maybe other Canon websites also have errors.As far as I remember the Canon 10×30 and 12×36 have single element field flatteners, or at least they did originally. It is possible that they changed to doublet field flatteners, but I doubt it.The fact that the 10×42 clear aperture was increased from 39 mm to 42 mm does not increase the field of view, which depends on the eyepiece.If the 10×30 was less than 30 mm and has now increased to 30 mm the field of view would remain the same. I suppose it's brightness might alter?My guess is that, and this is pure speculation, if the field of view is genuinely increased from 6.0° to 6.5° then maybe they have indeed switched to a doublet field flattener which would allow for a wider field eyepiece with the same edge performance as currently, or even perhaps better. This would increase the number of lens elements by one. Or they could have increased the actual eyepiece number of elements by one or used perhaps more exotic glass.What one needs is to actually see the 10×30 Mark II binocular and see what is written on it. Whether it says 6.0° or 6.5°.It would be nice to know that the real situation is.My comment about the weight being the same, was because I wonder if the prisms need to be increased in size if there is indeed a wider field of view.</blockquote>

Verification